# data[].attributes.body
Part 8
No, because my decision is not simply related to this matter.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 6
1.Technologies that alters natural processes such as gene drive.
2.Yes

# data[].attributes.body
Part 5
1. No, but it doesn't affect my view about protecting earth for future generations.
2. Yes, because our actions will affect them directly and indirectly.
3.Yes, we won't stop living to guarantee them a perfect life. Most thing we do affect the environment so we can not stop all our human activities even if we tried.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 4
1.Humans are only ones among many, they are not in the top of the ecological pyramid.
3. Yes, because I believe that humans are free to do whatever they want as long as it wouldn't affect others, and other species are considered "others" among us so humans changing the ecological system affect other species lives. And humans need to understand that other species aren't made to fulfill their needs.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 3
1.Anthropocentric
2. No, There might be some obligations such as leaving the place as is, no deforestation, no land reclamation and so on. People shouldn't be prevented from living somewhere, especially if they are originally from that place.
3.enhance protection of national park resources

# data[].attributes.body
Part 2
1. I wouldn't, because there are other options, but if it was my only choice, I would consider it.
2. Maybe they think that even though they are the last human on earth, there are still living creatures such as animals and plants. Moreover, maybe there is life in another planet than earth, and if earth explodes, it will affect their system. Lastly, they might see it as a horrible painful way to end their life.
3. They might believe that if they are the last human being on earth, their actions would not affect anyone else other than themselves and they are free to do anything as long as it wouldn't hurt others.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 1
1. dilemmas
2.Teamwork
3. Problem solving

# data[].attributes.headline
Week 4: Introduction to Moral Philosophy

# data[].attributes.subject
Week 4: Introduction to Moral Philosophy

# data[].attributes.body
Part3
1.
-Poor people will be used
-It's based on one's ability to pay
-Taking advantage by blackmailing or violence
-It objectifies people
2.
Utilitarianism, since selling kidneys or prostitution will give happiness or pleasure to the recipient, and money which is also pleasure to the giver. So it will maximize the total happiness and wellbeing

# data[].attributes.headline
Week 4: Introduction to Moral Philosophy

# data[].attributes.subject
Week 4: Introduction to Moral Philosophy

# data[].attributes.body
Part2
1.
-Prison cell upgrade
-Advertisements in famous sights
2.
-Friendship
3.
Market economy is a tool to organize productive activities. While market society is a way of life that works by selling products and services

# data[].attributes.headline
Week 4: Introduction to Moral Philosophy

# data[].attributes.subject
Week 4: Introduction to Moral Philosophy

# data[].attributes.body
1. Moral Relativism
Whether moral judgments are true or false to some extent.
Strengths:
flexible and simple
Weaknesses:
Slippery slope argument
2. Utilitarianism
Normative ethical theories that argues that an action is right if it maximizes one's happiness
Strengths:
Simple and focuses on the consequences actions
Weaknesses:
It's impossible to predict all the consequences of an action
3. Deontology
The morality of actions is based on whether the action is right or wrong with respect to certain rules.
Strengths:
It assures justice
Weaknesses:
It takes the consequences of an action for granted
4. Virtue Ethics
It emphasizes the role of character and virtue in moral philosophy
Strengths:
It encourages people to have a sense of empathy
Weaknesses:
It only helps individuals not people as a whole
5. Liberalism
A political and economic term which emphasizes equality and protection of rights.
Strengths:
There are costs for violating laws
Weaknesses:
Unrealistic

# data[].attributes.headline
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.subject
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.body
Reflection question 4:
Some risks can be considered acceptable, but to ensure ongoing progress of science and technology, an adequate level of safety should be maintained at all times. To make that possible, scientists and engineers should identify potential risks and study the possibility of this hazard to happen and its consequences. Knowing that nothing is completely free of risk, a tolerable level of risk is considered acceptable if scientists and engineers do their best to control it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.subject
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.body
Reflection question 3:
These documents did not convey the risks involved in the launch because they did not clarify the amount of damage possible using more scientific data and experiments to simulate the launch. They also did not calculate the risk assessment and they did not explain that the cost of Challenger Launch exceeds the cost of reducing the risk

# data[].attributes.headline
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.subject
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.body
Reflection question 2:
I believe that engineers and scientists are responsible for protecting the safety and welfare of the public. So as long as they realize that there are a possibility that the short or long-term consequences of their decisions or creations will affect the wellbeing of the public, they should be held responsible for their actions even though they are not the end-users of the product and will not harm the public directly.

# data[].attributes.headline
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.subject
Week 3: Science and Engineering Ethics Overview

# data[].attributes.body
Reflection question 1:
I would not change the report, because I am aware of the consequences of my decision. Although I do not know for sure whether or not this decision will harm the public, I still know that there are a possibility and I should do my best to avoid any potential harm.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 3
I believe that a car-driver should not change his way to risk his life to save careless people who did not obey the rules. I also think that if he would hit people whether he changed his lane or not, he should stay in his current lane because people on the other side might took a glance and did not see a car coming so they decided to jaywalk while the people in his current lane just started to walk and they had more chance to see if a car is coming. I also would choose to save humans over animals because the consequences of a human death are more than that of an animal and will probably affect more people for a longer time such as his friends and family. Other than that, I do not have gender, age, or social value preferences.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 2
I believe since the train can go in either of those paths, we should switch its direction to the path with the one person on. I believe that this is more ethical than pushing a person off the bridge because the person was out of the picture meaning that he did not take a risk to go to a dangerous place without paying attention to his surroundings unlike the other six, so we should not involve him in a problem that is not his. It would be either letting the one person or the five people die so I believe that we should go for the solution with the fewer loses.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 1
prompt 1:
I agree with the idea of having our ethical consideration for other people and things on different degrees meaning that you might not be as considerate with your cousin as much as with your sibling. I also agree with the outer dark rings that represent how we ethically consider people that we do not have direct social relations with. However, I do not agree with how the sphere is constructed in the inner lighter rings that are close to the center. In other words, not everyone cares about his blood relatives at the same level, for example, I might care about my neighbor more than my first cousin.